9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1490/- PMT. This was done based on the Final Findings and recommendations arrived at by the Designated Authority, Ministry of Commerce vide his Final Order No. 14/1/94 ADD, dated 19-3-1998. The Final Findings were reached by the Designated Authority after investigating imports and domestic production for the period April, 1996 to October, 1996 with regard to export prices and Indian manufacturing cost of PTA. The investigation had revealed a dumping margin varying from 6.65% to 9.63% in respect of various exporters of PTA from Korea RP. 2. Rule 23 of Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 provides that the Designated Authority shall re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nging from Rs. 1130/- to Rs. 1490/- imposed under Notification No. 13/92-Cus., dated 28-4-1998. M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd. has filed the present appeal, being aggrieved with the reduction of duty (strangely though on an application filed by them) made under Notification No. 99/2000, dated 11-7-2000. 3. The appeal submits that the rate of duty arrived at is entirely inconsistent with the relevant facts of the case and the findings reached by the Designated Authority itself. The appeal submits that the findings and the recommended rates of duty cannot go together. The appellants have pointed out that the Final Findings, after investigating imports from Korea RP and domestic production for the period from April, 1998 to September, 1998 ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the argument of the appeal, the learned Counsel for the appellant stressed that the reason for the incorrect determination of the rate of anti-dumping duty is the errors committed by the Designated Authority in determining the correct Landed Value of the imported PTA and Non-injurious Price for the domestically manufactured PTA. The learned Counsel also submitted that since elements of cost included or excluded while determining the Landed Value and Non-Injurious Price have not been disclosed to the appellant by the Designated Authority during the investigation proceedings, they were not in a position to pin point the exact errors in the working of the Designated Authority; but it remains clear that while determining the Non-Injurious Price ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mputing its cost, discarding its higher cost of production in the hands of the appellant. The learned Counsel stressed that such inconsistent cost computation practices adopted by the Designated Authority led to the determination of artificially lower Non-Injurious Price and recommendation of lower rate of duty as the duty has been determined as the difference between the Non-Injurious Price of domestically produced PTA and Landed Cost of imported PTA. Learned Counsel also submitted that the Designated Authority has committed an error while determining the landed cost also, inasmuch as provision has been made for handling charge @ 2% of the price of imported PTA. 5. As against the aforesaid submissions on behalf of the appellant, the Coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustry has suffered financial losses by trying to match the dumped prices. The authority has also clearly held that the appellant has suffered financial losses on account of the dumping of PTA by the Korean exports. Thus, the scope of the dispute is narrow and is limited to the correct computation of the rate of anti-dumping duty required to counter balance the effect of dumping. In the present case, anti dumping duty has been fixed as the injury margins, i.e. the difference between the Non-Injurious sale price of the domestic industry and the Landed Cost of dumped goods. In such a situation, a correct determination of Landed Cost and Non-Injurious Price is very vital to ensure that the anti-dumping duty imposed matches the injury caused to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd re-computation of Landed Cost after excluding 2% handling charges are required to be done in the present case in view of those decisions. 7. At the end of the appeal proceedings, the Designated Authority made available to us re-computed injury margin, i.e. the difference between the Non-Injurious Price worked out for the domestic industry and Landed Value of imported goods. Consequent to re-determination of Landed Value after excluding 2% handling charges, and Non-Injurious Price based on the cost of production of both electricity and paraxylene, the injury margins for PTA originating in or exported from Korea RP are found to be US $ 33.72 in respect of exports by M/s. Samsung Petrochemicals Co. Ltd. (SPC) and US $ 34.67 in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
